The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. In full view of the background leading up to the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, and the fact that the victim was aware of the fact that the defendant was the bad credit standing, the court below erred by misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles recognized by the court below, notwithstanding the fact that the defendant

B. Considering the fact that the Defendant actually attempted to carry on entertainment-related business, but as a result, led to the instant case, the lower court’s imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) is unreasonable.

2. The following circumstances revealed by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined in the judgment of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, that is, the victim stated that the defendant would repay the money without delay, or would request the lending company to repay the money, and that the contents of the Kakao Stockholm conversation between the defendant and the victim also correspond to the above statement with the purport that the defendant would have to pay the money to the victim or the victim urged the payment to the defendant. In light of the above facts, the victim believed that the defendant was a person with bad credit standing, even though he was aware that the defendant was a person with bad credit standing, and thus, the victim provided a loan or loan to the defendant. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is rejected.

3. The instant crime on the assertion of unfair sentencing was committed by deceiving a considerable amount of money through the use of personal trust relationship, and the nature of such crime is not good, and the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution even though he attempted to do so.

However, considering that the defendant's repayment of additional money to the victim when the defendant was in a trial and the victim is not subject to punishment by agreement, the court below's punishment is considered to be heavy.

4...